MUMBAI: The Supreme Court ban on liquor sale along highways is limited to retail shops and vends, and does not apply to hotels, restaurants and bars, according to two eminent former judges.
In separate and similar opinions to two hotel and restaurant associations, former Supreme Court Justice B N Srikrishna and former Delhi high court Chief Justice A P Shah have interpreted the SC order differently from excise and other authorities.
Srikrishna said the “question before the SC and answered by the SC categorically was that no liquor vends should be permitted within certain distance of highways and finally all liquor licenses for shops and vends, if already issued, shall end by March 31 after which there shall be no fresh liquor licenses issued.”
Shah, who also served as chairman of the Law Commission, “opined” that the ban “applies only to liquor shops and vends and does not extend to hotels and restaurants within 500 metres from the national and state highways across the country”.
The SC by its orders on December 15, 2016 had directed that it “restrains the grant of licences for the sale of liquor along national and state highways and within 500 metres of the outer edge of a highway or of a service lane along the state highway.”
While the judges’ opinions were based on the directions issued by the SC in December, hotel and restaurant owners contend that the March 31 order was in line with what the court had earlier laid down. The only modification was that “for areas comprised in local bodies with a population of up to 20,000 people”, it reduced the distance from highway to 220 metres.
Srikrishna said, “In my opinion, it would be necessary to look at the background in which the judgment by SC was rendered to appreciate its import.” Both he and Shah observed how two different public interest litigations had sought implementation of a liquor policy of the Centre and of various states to regulate retail liquor outlets or vends along and close to the highways to deal with the rise in road accidents due to drunken driving. The PILs were before the high courts of Madras and Punjab & Haryana in 2012. Shah said, “It is pertinent to note that neither of these two judgements (by the two high courts) dealt with serving of alcohol in hotels or restaurants…” A distinction in liquor licenses for various establishments was a prominent reason both legal luminaries cited to state why the SC ban would apply only to liquor vends/shops and not hotels or restaurants. “Licenses issued for sale of liquor and consumption of liquor on premises are distinctly different and operate in favour of different categories of establishment,” said Srikrishna. “A liquor vend or shop is not permitted to allow consumption of alcohol on its premises. Conversely, an establishment like a bar, restaurant or a hotel, is permitted to allow consumption but not allowed to sell liquor on its premises,” he noted.
Shah too said, “It is important to understand different licences are granted for sale or service of liquor in shops and in hotels/restaurants.” The Punjab & Haryana HC too had taken note of “the menace of drinking and driving arising from liquor vends being easily accessible from highways,” he said Srikrishna said, “A reading of the SC judgment (dated December 15) would clearly indicate that all observations made by the SC were against permitting liquor vends/shops within certain distance of the highways…The direction also suggests that what is prohibited is visibility of a shop for sale of liquor.”
Senior advocate Lalit Bhasin also said that the March 31 order does not apply to hotels, restaurant or bars. “In the main judgement there is not a whisper about any prohibition on service of alcoholic beverages by hotels, restaurants and bars located close to the highways,” he said. These, he added, were “different and distinct” from shops and vends, and the two could not be “clubbed together”.